Francais | English | Espanõl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Enabling legislation for the British national identity card was passed under the Identity Cards Act 2006 [1]. The multi-billion pound scheme [2] has yet to enter procurement.

The cards have a lesser role than the extensive database they are linked to, which is known as the National Identity Register (NIR). The Act specifies fifty categories of information that the NIR can hold on each citizen [3], including up to 10 fingerprints, digitised facial scan and iris scan, current and past UK and overseas places of residence of all residents of the UK throughout their lives and indexes to other Government databases - which allows them to be connected. The legislation also says that any further information can be added.

The legislation also says that those renewing or applying for passports must be entered on to the NIR. It is expected that this will happen soon after the UK Passport Service, which has now been renamed the Identity and Passport Service (IPS), start interviewing passport applicants to verify their identity.[4]

Various degrees of concern about the scheme have been expressed by human rights experts, security experts and IT experts amongst others.

Contents 1 Timescale and implementation progress 2 Historical and international comparisons 2.1 ID cards during the World Wars 2.2 International comparisons 3 The system 3.1 Legal requirements 3.2 National Identity Register 3.3 Identity Registration Number 3.4 Penalties 3.5 Universal children's database 4 Reaction 4.1 Public reaction 4.1.1 2003 4.1.2 2004 4.1.3 2005 4.1.4 2006 4.2 Terrorism and crime 4.3 Lord Carlile and Lord Stevens 5 Concerns 5.1 Feature creep 5.2 Database extent and access 5.3 Concerns raised by the Information Commissioner 5.4 Human rights 5.5 Ethnic minorities 5.6 Vulnerable individuals 5.7 Identity theft 5.7.1 Card tampering and forging 5.8 Technology 5.9 Costs 5.10 Poor use of funds 5.11 Effectiveness 5.12 Totalitarian drift 6 Opposition campaigns 7 See also 8 References 9 External links 9.1 News stories 9.2 Guides 9.3 Opposition groups

[edit] Timescale and implementation progress

On October 11 2006, the Government announced a timescale described as "highly ambitious" by computer experts. [5] The Home Office said they will publish an ID management action plan in the months from November 2006, followed by agreements with departments on their uses for the system. There will be a report on potential private sector uses for the scheme before 2007 Budget.

On September 25 2006, Home Office Minister Liam Byrne said that "There are opportunities which give me optimism to think that actually there is a way of exploiting systems already in place in a way which brings down the costs quite substantially" [6]

Emails leaked in June 2006 [7] indicate that the plan is already in difficulty, with plans for the early introduction of a limited register and ID card with reduced biometrics known as the 'early variant' described as a "huge risk".

The schedule for putting passport applicants & renewers details on the National Identity Register (NIR) has not been and may never be announced. It is not expected to happen until Spring 2007 according to NO2ID. Applicants will be able to opt out of having a card issued until 2010 although they cannot opt out of having their details recorded on the NIR. Identity cards will be compulsory for anyone getting a new or renewed passport after January 1st 2010. Registration will become compulsory for non-UK passport holders resident in the UK by 2013. The Home Office currently estimates ID cards will be available from 2009. [8]

[edit] Historical and international comparisons

[edit] ID cards during the World Wars

Compulsory identity cards were first issued in the United Kingdom during World War I, and abandoned in 1919. Cards were re-introduced during World War II under the National Registration Act 1939, but were abandoned seven years after the end of that war in 1952, amid widespread public resentment. Opposition reached its peak with the 1951 court case of Willcock v Muckle, after Clarence Henry Willcock refused to produce his identity card. The judge in the case said that the cards were an "annoyance" and "tended to turn law-abiding subjects into law breakers".

[edit] International comparisons

If introduced, Britain would become the fifth (mostly) common law country in the world to accept ID cards in peacetime, along with Cyprus, Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore.

Whilst 21 of 25 other countries in the EU have some form of ID card, these are not necessarily compulsory, biometric, or linked to a national database, and may have a far lower cost than that proposed for the British ID card. ^{[citation needed]}

There has been a move to introduce biometrics into identity and travel documents. The ICAO has recommended that all countries adopt biometric passports, and the United States has made it a future requirement for entering the US under the visa waiver programme. Biometric border control systems have been established in the United States and the United Arab Emirates and the EU is introducing biometric visas.

[edit] The system

[edit] Legal requirements

Under the NIR UK Residents will be required to:

• Attend in person to be photographed, have their fingerprints taken and iris scanned.
• To promptly inform the police or Home Office if a card is lost or damaged.
• To promptly inform the National Identity Register of any change of address.
• To promptly inform the National Identity Register of significant changes to their personal life.

Failure to comply with these requirements may result in a fine or imprisonment.

[edit] National Identity Register

Key to the ID Card scheme will be a centralised computer database, the National Identity Register (NIR). To identify someone it will always not be necessary to check their card, since identity could be determined by a taking a biometric scan and matching it against a database entry.

The Home Office said ID cards will be issued and thus the National Identity Register will be in place by 2009.

[edit] Identity Registration Number

One entry on the NIR is the Identity Registration Number. The Home Office have recognised that a unique identifier is needed as a primary key for the database.

The Home Office Benefits Overview document [9] describes how the IRN enables data sharing amongst police databases (including the Police DNA database), legal databases, and even corporate databases (including bank and travel operators).

[edit] Penalties

Failure to inform the Government of a change of address or other personal details will result in a fine of £1,000. Fines for refusing to register have been removed until a later Bill instead you may be denied a passport and/or other designated documents (eg driving licence). Failure to inform the Government if the card is tampered with, damaged, lost or stolen may result in a prison sentence of up to 51 weeks [10].

[edit] Universal children's database

Under the provisions of the Children Act 2004, the Government plan to create a Universal Child Database of all children living in the UK with the aim of helping to identify and protect children at risk.

[edit] Reaction

[edit] Public reaction

[edit] 2003

The announcement of the scheme followed a public consultation, particularly among 'stakeholder groups' pdf. At March 2003 the government stated that the overall results were:

in favour: 2606 responses (61%)

against: 1587 responses (38%)

neutral: 48 responses (1%)

However the government has been criticised for ignoring the overwhelming majority of those replying who stated that they did not want national identity cards. The government claimed that over five thousand negative online responses through a single portal site, organised by stand, represented one lobby group so treated them as one reply, thus reversing what would otherwise have been recognised as an overwhelming vote against national identity cards. However, the Government claimed that many supportive organisations did not number their entire membership numbers in their submissions and thus, it would not be a true representation to include each individual submission by this campaign.

[edit] 2004

Some polls have indicated that public opinion on the issue varies across the UK. The 2004 State of the Nation poll [11] by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust showed that opinion in Scotland was far less supportive than that in the rest of the UK. Although that trend is reversed in other polls. ^{[citation needed]}

In a poll for Detica conducted by MORI in March 2004 [12] showed that 80% of those polled were in favour of a national identity card (11% opposed), although 67% of them have little or no knowledge about the Government's proposed national ID card scheme. Furthermore, only 54% were prepared to pay for a card, with 80% unwilling to pay more that £25. 83% were in favour of carrying the card at all times, though only 44% were in favour of the police being given powers to see it on demand. 58% doubted that the Government could bring in such a scheme smoothly.

In May 2004 a YouGov poll for Privacy International [13] indicated that 61% of the population supported compulsory identity cards. However in respect of the database maintenance elements, 47% opposed the legal requirement to notify a change of address (compared to 41% in favour), while 45% were against the legal requirement to report lost, stolen or damaged cards (44% in favour). 27% of those polled were 'strongly opposed' to fines. In the under 30 age group, 61% were opposed to fines. Of those opposing the scheme (percentage unstated), 28% would take part in demonstrations, 16% would take part in civil disobedience, and 6% would prefer prison to registering.

[edit] 2005

National opinion polls suggest that the expected cost of the cards affects levels of support. An estimate from the Home Office placed the cost of a 10-year passport and ID card package at £85, while after the 2005 General Election in May 2005 they issued a revised figure of over £93, which a subsequent announcement that a "standalone" ID card would cost £30. Two polls conducted by TNS at the end of 2005 amongst British Citizens and Foreign Residents demonstrated over 65% support for identity cards backed by a central database with a cost of an identity card at £30 and a passport/identity card package at approximately £100 ^{[citation needed]}. However, the research conducted by MORI in 2004 showed that only 20% were willing to pay more than £25.

A 2005 poll on the BBC web site indicated that of the nearly 9,000 voting, 17% were in favour, 83% against [14]. However, internet polls cannot be considered as being very reliable - indeed, the wording under the poll result states that results of such polls cannot be taken as indicative of public opinion.

Before the July 2005 London bombings, a Telegraph/YouGov poll [15] showed that 66% of people were opposed to the scheme if it cost £6bn and 81% opposed if it cost £10-19bn. However, the questions in such polls have often failed to reflect that the costs issued by the Government already included the running costs of the existing Passport Service ^{[citation needed]}.

The NO2ID opposition group announced in September 2005 that 11,369 people have pledged to refuse to register for an ID card and will donate £10 to a legal defence fund if the Bill becomes law. In Australia, concerted opposition by organisations and individuals refusing to cooperate with their identity scheme led to it being abandoned in 1987 [16], however, more recently the idea of a national identity card has again been raised in Australia [17].

[edit] 2006

In February 2006, a YouGov/Daily Telegraph poll [18] indicated that public support for the scheme had fallen to 52% (with 37% opposed), despite 60% of those polled stating that those with nothing to hide should have no objection to the scheme. It revealed that the following percentages of people thought that the scheme would:

• 64% - cut benefit fraud
• 62% - cut health tourism
• 55% - cut bogus asylum-seekers
• 43% - help catch criminals
• 42% - will make life simpler and more convenient
• 21% - cut chances of terrorist atrocities

At the same time, it showed that the following percentages thought:

• 80% - determined criminals and terrorists will forge the cards
• 74% - the scheme will be enormously expensive
• 71% - information will be hacked or leaked
• 61% - information will be improperly passed to foreign governments
• 60% - will be time consuming and inconvenient
• 55% - will contain incorrect information
• 51% - card readers will often malfunction or read inaccurately

In July 2006, an ICM poll[19] indicated that public support had fallen further to 46%, with opposition growing to 51%:

Q1. The government has proposed the introduction of identity cards that in combination with your passport, will cost around £93. From what you have seen or heard do you think the proposal is...?

• Very good idea 12%
• Good idea 34%
• Bad idea 29%
• Very bad idea 22%

Q2. As part of the National Identity Scheme the government has also proposed that everyone is required to attend an interview to give personal details about themselves for use by the police, tax authorities and all other government departments. From what you have seen or heard do you think that this is a..?

• Very good idea 10%
• Good idea 31%
• Bad idea 33%
• Very bad idea 23%

[edit] Terrorism and crime

Eliza Manningham-Buller, the current head of the Security Services is on record in her support of the introduction of identity cards, as is Sir Ian Blair, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and his predecessor, Sir John (now Lord) Stevens. The Association of Chief Police Officers are also supportive.

However, in November 2005 Dame Stella Rimington, former Director General of Britain's counter-intelligence and security agency MI5, questioned the usefulness of the proposed scheme. Addressing the Association of Colleges annual conference, she stated[20]:

My angle on ID cards is that they may be of some use but only if they can be made unforgeable - and all our other documentation is quite easy to forge.

ID cards may be helpful in all kinds of things but I don't think they are necessarily going to make us any safer.

ID cards have possibly some purpose. But I don't think that anybody in the Intelligence Services, particularly in my former service, would be pressing for ID cards

Her intervention caused a good deal of controversy amongst supporters and opponents of the scheme, especially as Manningham-Buller stated that ID cards would in fact disrupt the activities of terrorists, noting that significant numbers of terrorists take advantage of the weaknesses of current identification methods to assist their activities.

ID cards will not help fight crime or terrorism. Generally, the police’s problem is not identifying those arrested but catching criminals in the first place. The terrorists responsible for 9/11 and the Madrid bombings all carried valid identity documents. Knowing someone’s identity is different from knowing how they will behave. No one can seriously tell that ID cards would have prevented the London bombings. The fight against crime and terrorism needs more police and better police work, not ID cards.<ref name= 090806>ID cards. Lynne Featherstone. Retrieved on September 8, 2006.</ref>

[edit] Lord Carlile and Lord Stevens

Lord Carlile was appointed on 11 September 2001 to independently review the working of British Terrorism Act and subsequent anti-terrorist laws [21]. Talking on GMTV on January 29th, 2006, he expressed his views on the proposed legislation, saying[22]:

ID cards could be of some value in the fight against terrorism but they are probably of quite limited value.

They would be an advantage but that advantage has to be judged against the disadvantages which Parliament may see in ID cards.

There may be a gain from the security viewpoint in the curtailment of civil liberties, but Parliament has to be the judge about whether the proportion is right.

However, speaking on the same programme, Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington, former Met Police Commissioner, argued in favour for the need for identity cards, saying they had benefits in tackling serious crimes, such as money laundering and identity theft.

[edit] Concerns

[edit] Feature creep

Even without new primary legislation, the Identity Cards Act allows the potential scope of the scheme to be much greater than that usually publicised by the Government.

For example, Gordon Brown was reported to be "planning a massive expansion of the ID cards project that would widen surveillance of everyday life by allowing high-street businesses to share confidential information with police databases." [23] He apparently described how "police could be alerted as soon as a wanted person used a biometric-enabled cash card or even entered a building via an iris-scan door." [24]

The British ID cards went from 3 functions during World War II to 39 by the time it was abolished. [25]

[edit] Database extent and access

The amount of data which can be recorded on the NIR is unlimited. 3 of the fields are keys to the tax, benefits, passports, DVLA and ANPR databases and thus can be easily incorporated - making easily the most intrusive database on any country's citizens. The Benefits Overview document [26] describe how the IRN is designed to allow linking with any database, in particular the police databases including the controversial DNA database.

Other sensitive databases that could be cross-linked (simply by recording your NIR on them) include the Children's Index, the NHS "spine" of medical records, the 6 months of data retention by phone companies and ISPs etc.

Home Office forecasts envisage that "265 government departments and as many as 48,000 accredited private sector organisations" would have access to the database, and that 163 million identity verifications or more may take place each year [27].

[edit] Concerns raised by the Information Commissioner

In a press release on July 30, 2004 (.doc file), Richard Thomas the Information Commissioner stated that: a NIR raise substantial data protection and personal privacy concerns. He sought clarification of why so much personal information needed to be kept as part of establishing an individual's identity and indicated concern about the wide range of bodies who would view the records of services individuals have used. The Commissioner has also pointed out that those who renew or apply for a driving licence or passport will be automatically added to the National Identity Register, so losing the option of not registering.

In February 2003, on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, he warned that ID cards could become a target for identiy theft by organised crime.

[edit] Human rights

On February 2, 2005, Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights questioned the compatibility of the Bill with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to respect for private life) and Article 14 (the right to non-discrimination) [28], both of which are encapsulated with the UK's own Human Rights Act.

[edit] Ethnic minorities

The Government's Race Equality Impact Assessment pdf indicates that there is significant concern among some ethnic groups over how the Police would use their powers under an Identity Cards Act, with 64% of black and 53% of Indian respondents expressing concern, particularly about the potential for abuse and discrimination. In their January 2005 report doc on the Bill, the Commission for Racial Equality state that the fear of discrimination is neither misconceived nor exaggerated, and note that this is also an ongoing issue in Germany, the Netherlands and France.

The CRE are also concerned that disproportionate requirement by employers and the authorities for ethnic minorities to identify themselves may create a two tiered structure amongst racial groups, with foreign nationals and British ethnic minorities feeling compelled to register while British white persons do not. They also comment that the impact on those who have been living and working illegally in the UK for many years would entrench an underclass, undermining community cohesion.

According to the CRE, certain groups who move location frequently and who tend to live on low incomes (such as gypsies, travellers, asylum-seekers and refugees) risk being criminalised under the legislation through failing to update their registration each time they move due to lack of funds to pay the fee that may be charged.

ID cards will also lead to discrimination and harassment. As the Government encourage the police to detect illegal immigrants and terrorist suspects, black, Muslim, and Asian people will inevitably be targeted. The damage to community relations will compound an already tinderbox climate post 7 July 2005 London bombings.<ref name= 090806>ID cards. Lynne Featherstone. Retrieved on September 8, 2006.</ref>

[edit] Vulnerable individuals

The CRE have also recommended that more work is required to protect the interests of vulnerable individuals. For example, women escaping a violent partner or a forced marriage may be at risk if their previous names or addresses are disclosed.

[edit] Identity theft

Tony Blair said "ID cards are needed to stop the soaring costs of identity theft" in May 2005 [29]. However, security experts have claimed that placing trust in a single document may make identity theft easier, since only this document needs to be targeted [30].

Falsely obtaining such a 'secure' identity becomes very valuable because people are less likely to question its validity. This has happened in Australia, where identity theft has risen above British levels since the introduction of a widely used Tax File Number. Identity theft surrounding the Social Security Number is also a major problem in the USA. However, it can be argued that part of the problem in these countries arises from the lack of a national ID card as no positive identification exists which links one to one's unique ID number such as the Social Security Number. It is the lack of such means of identification, not necessarily the existence of the unique number itself, which promotes ID theft since there are no easily available means to verify one's SSN (such as a card with a person's SSN and photograph).

However, others claim that such comparisons cannot be directly compared with the introduction of identity cards and point out that such critiques usually offer not any alternative solutions to identity theft as it continues to grow.

Opponents to the scheme state that in order to apply for the new identity cards, existing documents such as passports will be used to prove identity; however, such identification is proficiently forged, allowing identity thieves posing as someone else to apply for cards. While new applications could be made using false documentation, existing cards and database entries would also be targets. Supporters note that such claims ignore that actual process, which allows for electronic checks of applications rather than a solely paper based system.

The NIR database would make an attractive target for computer hackers. Opponents also claim that any system involving human operators is liable to social engineering attacks, infiltration or bribery or blackmail of staff. Supporters claim that there are potential ways of organising working processes to stop such attacks.

Due to the supposed security of the British system, proving that your identity has been stolen could prove problematic. If a person's biometric information is discovered and exploited by an identity thief the subject has little recourse, since such information by definition cannot be changed or reissued.

[edit] Card tampering and forging

In addition to problems affecting the database, there may be the tampering or superficial forging of the actual biometric identity cards. In a recent case in Germany, criminals forged an ID card that included biometric data.<ref name= 090806>ID cards. Lynne Featherstone. Retrieved on September 8, 2006.</ref>

A number of academics also point to problems of removing human interaction from security systems. Such problems can be seen with Chip and PIN credit card systems [31]. While not a criticism of the technology itself, the work notes that operators cannot simply leave the security up to the technology and must remain vigilant in preventing suspicious behaviour.

[edit] Technology

Elsewhere, doubts remain concerning the practicability of the scheme, relying on unproven technologies such as iris scanning, and even the very best system will be liable to a small error rate. In some cases this error rate can disproportionately affect certain ethnic minorities (eg Afro-Caribbeans, for iris scanning). Existing government systems are not appropriate for the issuing to UK citizens from 2009.[32]

[edit] Costs

By the start of 2005 the expected cost of the scheme had doubled to £5.5 billion in six months [33]. Estimated running costs were revised upward by the Home Office to £584 million per year after the 2005 General Election. However, they refused to give a cost for setting up the scheme as the information was deemed commercially sensitive.

Setting out a detailed case against the ID cards in a report by Peter Lilley MP, the centre-right think tank the Bow Group suggested that the costs could easily double pdf. In May 2005 a leaked draft report by the London School of Economics [34] suggested that costs in the range £12 billion - £18 billion (double to triple the government's estimates), which for the top estimate works out at £300 per registration. Among other factors for the higher estimate was the LSE's conclusion that people may need to be re-scanned every 5 years (rather than every 10 as had previously been expected), as biometric measurements change with age.

However, supporters claim that the reliabilty of such reports has come into question, arguing that a number of important failings in the research behind the LSE costings have been revealed. In the course of Parliamentary debate, the Government has pointed out basic errors in the report. It is claimed that research demonstrated that the claim that biometrics would have to be re-recorded every 5 years does not match reputable research and was not supported by any research in the London School of Economics report, and that biometric experts quoted in the LSE reports have sought to distance themselves from its findings.

The Government has also claimed that the authors of these estimates are established opponents to the scheme and cannot be considered unbiased academic sources.

However, a number of other major government IT projects have been expensive failures yet none are as complex as the ID card scheme.

Tony McNulty, Home Office minister responsible for the scheme, has responded to this criticism by saying a "ceiling" on costs would be announced in October 2005 (BBC). There are now indications that the Government is looking at ways of subsidising the scheme by charging other Government Departments, with the implication that this would result in increased charges for other Government services to individuals or businesses [35].

As of October 10, 2005, over £20m had been spent on preliminary work [36].

In October 2006, the Government declared it would cost £5.4bn to run the ID cards scheme for the next 10 years.[37] The overall price tag will be put before Parliament in the week of October 11 2006. Most of the cost will be for the biometric passport scheme that will act as a first step to ID cards. 70 per cent of the cost will be incurred just to keep British passports up to international standards. Only about 15 per cent is to be spent on technology. Until it is clear what the government is procuring, it is difficult to define the cost. It was reported on October 12 2006 that, concerning the technology for the national biometric identity card scheme, the government expects to spend about £800m.[38] The introduction of biometric passports has increased the cost of a passport to £66. And the introduction of controversial ID cards could increase costs to nearly one hundred pounds.[39]

[edit] Poor use of funds

Irrespective of the exact costs of the scheme, critics have suggested that it would be better to use any available cash to increase funding to bodies tasked with tackling the various issues involved, for example to enhance immigration controls at all ports of entry [40], or to increase the budget of MI5.

As an example of the funds involved, the disputed government 2005 estimate for the annual cost of the ID card scheme is greater than the 2006-07 funding for the new Serious Organised Crime Agency, believed to be £400m [41].

[edit] Effectiveness

The Bow Group are also of the opinion that ID cards offer a "largely illusory solution"; police have problems proving people guilty, not identifying suspects; terrorists normally conceal their intentions rather than their identities; benefit fraudsters usually misrepresent their circumstances, not who they are; and all illegal immigrants can, and most do, claim asylum whereupon they are already required to have an identity card containing their finger prints and photo.

There is also scepticism among opponents over the ability of the cards to help identify illegal workers. Employers are already required to check identities but in 2003 there were only two prosecutions for employing an illegal worker^{[verification needed]}. ID cards will not thwart unscrupulous employers or suddenly turn a beleaguered Home Office into a well-oiled machine. Neither will ID cards shore up our porous borders. Countries that have ID cards still have benefit fraud.<ref name= 090806>ID cards. Lynne Featherstone. Retrieved on September 8, 2006.</ref>

David Blunkett himself stated that "ID Cards won't stop terrorism". His successor, Charles Clarke, said the same in the aftermath of the 7 July 2005 London bombings [42], but claimed that they might help identify the perpetrators. ID card opponents have cited the failure of Spanish ID cards to prevent the Madrid train bombings as an example of the ineffectiveness of ID cards as an anti-terrorism measure.

[edit] Totalitarian drift

A further concern among some is that the identity cards scheme is just one part of an unwitting drift towards totalitarianism, a reverse in the relationship between citizen and state, and a diminution of the individual liberty for which the nation was famous. In this view, the Identity Cards Bill is only one element, others being:

• The fear of a surveillance society raised by the Information Commissioner;
• The attack on habeas corpus through the attempt to extend pre-charge detention from 14 to 90 days in the Terrorism Act 2006 (finally extended to 28 days), and the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects under the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 (since ruled illegal);
• Alleged restrictions on the freedom of speech contained within the Racial and Religious Hatred Act [43] and the Terrorism Act 2006;
• The suppression of free speech by the use of the Terrorism Act 2000 to suppress anti-war protests [44] and demonstrations at arms fairs [45].
• The extension of the power of arrest to anyone committing any offence of any nature, as well as to those suspected of being about to commit such an offence, under section 110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.
• The lengthening of the duration of search warrants from 1 month to 3, their widening to cover multiple searches at multiple premises, and their extension to cover many more offences due to the abolition of the concept of a 'serious arrestable offence', under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.
• The introduction of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act.

Supporters of these changes claim that they are necessary due to the international terrorist threat, that any reduction in individual liberty is justified by the greater common good, and that accusations of totalitarianism are alarmist. Opponents claim that they damage the values of freedom for which the country has long stood and which citizens gave their lives to protect during World War II.

Criticisms of Tony Blair's authoritarianism

[edit] Opposition campaigns

In May 2006, NO2ID launched the "Renew for Freedom" campaign [46], urging passport holders to renew their passports in the summer of 2006 to delay being entered on the National Identity Register. This followed the comment made by Charles Clarke in the House of Commons that anyone who feels strongly enough about the linkage [between passports and the ID scheme] not to want to be issued with an ID card in the initial phase will be free to surrender their existing passport and apply for a new passport before the designation order takes effect [47].

In response, the Home Office said that it was hard to see what would be achieved, other than incurring unnecessary expense by renewing passports early [48]. However, it should be remembered that the cost of a passport is set to rise in October 2006 and nearly double once identity cards are introduced.

[edit] See also

• NO2ID opposition group
• Defy-ID opposition group
• Reform
• Ian Brown - Kiss Ya Lips (No I.D.)

• French national identity card
• British passport
• Biometric passport
• Human rights in the United Kingdom

• UK topics
• Common Travel Area
• Schengen Information System

[edit] References

[edit] External links

• Identity Cards Act 2006
• Text of the Identity Cards Bill, as amended on Report in the House of Lords on 30th January 2006
• Text of the Identity Cards Bill, November 2004
• List of the 279 proposed amendments in the Lords Committee Stage, January 2006
• British Government website about the scheme
• Text of Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
• The Privacy and Data Protection Act 2006
• PASSPORT INTERVIEWS – PROPOSED NETWORK OF OFFICES May 2006
• Map of centres September 2006

[edit] News stories

• 14 September 2006, epolitix.com, Minister defends data-sharing scheme
• 7 August 2006, Guardian, Hackers crack new biometric passports
• 14 June 2006, epolitix.com, Amnesty for illegal immigrants once identity cards in place?
• 24 May 2006, BBC, Lib Dems back the "Renew for Freedom" campaign
• 4 April 2006, The Register, Passport rule change anticipates ID refusenik sabotage efforts
• 30 March 2006, BBC, Identity cards will be made compulsory if Labour wins the next election
• 13 February 2006, The Daily Mirror, Motorists could soon be forced to carry an ID card
• 30 January 2006, BBC, Transsexuals 'to get 2 ID cards'
• 17 January 2006, The Times, Peers deal Blair blow over '£19bn cost of ID cards'
• 8 December 2005, Guardian, A pan-European ID card will make a bad idea even worse
• 17 November 2005, BBC, Ex-MI5 chief sparks ID card row
• 18 October 2005, The Scotsman, Microsoft security officer: ID cards will lead to 'massive fraud'
• 12 October 2005, The Register. support for ID cards collapses
• 4 August 2005, BBC, Labour admits ID card 'oversell'
• 8 July 2005, BBC, Chales Clarke: ID cards wouldn't stop bomb attacks
• 5 July 2005, The Register, "Clarke's ID card cost laundry starts to break surface"
• 3 July 2005, The Observer, Rebels ready to face prison over ID cards: Refuseniks will copy Australian tactics to foil scheme
• July 2 2005, Muriel Gray in The Guardian, Nobody has nothing to hide: Identity cards will deprive the innocent of one of their most basic rights
• "ID cards 'will reveal detail of daily life'" - Information commissioner warns of surveillance society
• Dec 2004 Guardian Legal advice on ID cards kept secret
• Dec 2004 Guardian If you value your freedom, reject this sinister ID card
• Apr 2004 Times It is right to experiment with identity cards
• Apr 2004 Bloomberg Identity Card Will Make Fraud Easier
• Jul 2003 Statewatch Identity cards in the UK - a lesson from history
• Jul 2002 Daily Telegraph £70 ID card to combine passport and car licence
• Sep 2001 Guardian ID cards might solve asylum crisis

[edit] Guides

• Mar 2005 London School of Economics An Assessment of the UK Identity Cards Bill and its Implications
• Feb 2005 Bow Group report The Case Against ID Cards, by Rt Hon Peter Lilley MP
• Dec 2004 BBC Identity card Q&A
• Jun 2004 Electricinca An analysis of the British national identity card
• May 2004 The Register Everything you never wanted to know about the UK ID card
• Nov 2003 Guardian Q&A
• Sep 2001 Telegraph The case for and against identity cards
• Trevor Mendham UK ID Cards - the case against

[edit] Opposition groups

• No2ID: UK campaign against ID Cards and mass surveillance
• Defy-ID
• Liberty - human rights concerns
• Reform
• idFolly
• Haringey Against Identity Cards
• Youth Against ID